Does Darwin’s Naturalization Hypothesis Explain Fish Invasions?

Abstract

Darwin’s naturalization hypothesis predicts that introduced species tend not to invade areas containing congeneric native species, because they would otherwise compete with their close relatives and would likely encounter predators and pathogens that can attack them. An opposing view is that introduced species should succeed in areas where native congeners are present because they are more likely to share traits that pre-adapt them to their new environment. A test of both these hypotheses using data on fish introductions from several independent regions fails to support either viewpoints. In contrast to studies of nonindigenous plants, our results suggest that taxonomic affiliation is not an important general predictor of fish invasion success.

References

Case TJ (1990). Invasion resistance arises in strongly interacting species-rich model competition communities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 87: 9610–9614PubMedView Article

Mills EL, Scheuerell MD, Carlton J and Strayer DL (1997) Biological invasions in the Hudson River basin: an inventory and historical analysis. New York State Museum Circular No. 57, New York State Education Department, Albany

Ricciardi A and Rasmussen JB (1998). Predicting the identity and impact of future biological invaders: a priority for aquatic resource management. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 55: 1759–1765View Article